Ayodhya: The diversion of donations from the Ram Mandir here took place during the cash-counting process and involved a network of people who allegedly removed, concealed and distributed the pilfered funds, according to the nearly 70,000-page chargesheet filed by the Supreme Court-mandated special investigation team (SIT) probing the offerings embezzlement case.
The document cites 105 instances of removal of cash from the counting area captured on CCTV cameras, besides thousands of recovered messages and cash and valuables seized during the probe.
The chargesheet names eight accused — Anukalp Mishra, Avinash Shukla alias Shani, Lavkush Mishra, Manish Kumar Yadav, Karunesh Pandey, Ramashankar Mishra, Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu and Subhash Srivastava — all of whom are in judicial custody.
The case was registered on June 25 on the complaint of Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust member Krishna Mohan following a preliminary SIT inquiry into alleged irregularities in the handling of donations.
According to the chargesheet, investigators identified 105 instances of unauthorised removal or concealment of cash from the counting facility by examining CCTV footage, corroborating it with digital evidence, witness statements, banking records and a forensic audit.
The SIT has said it found no evidence of pilferage during the subsequent transfer of the counted money to banks.
The investigation also tracked the alleged money trail through bank accounts, properties, vehicles and other assets linked to the accused and their relatives. Police recovered Rs 79.85 lakh allegedly linked to the suspected embezzlement from seven of the eight accused, with no such recovery reported from Srivastava.
Police have described Anukalp Mishra as the main conspirator. The chargesheet says he remained in contact with his relative Lavkush Mishra and accused Avinash Shukla through text messages.
Investigators claim to have recovered more than 3,000 deleted messages from the mobile phones of the accused. According to the chargesheet, the conversations allegedly discussed removing, concealing, transporting and distributing the stolen cash.
Police have treated the conversation as part of digital evidence relating to the alleged conspiracy.
The chargesheet alleges that money removed during counting was subsequently concealed and distributed.
CCTV footage has also been cited to attribute specific alleged acts to some accused. According to the investigation report, Avinash Shukla was allegedly involved in removing donation money on 85 occasions, while Anukalp Mishra allegedly assisted on 56 occasions, Karunesh Pandey on 68 occasions and Lavkush Mishra on 52 occasions.
The chargesheet details the alleged influence exercised by Ram Shankar Yadav alias Tinnu, who worked as the driver of former Trust general secretary Champat Rai.
According to the investigation, Tinnu did not hold a formal position at the temple but allegedly exercised influence over several internal arrangements. The chargesheet alleges that he had access to the donation-counting room and possessed keys to donation boxes.
It also refers to his alleged role in opening the entry gate for goods vehicles, giving instructions to personnel and facilitating VIP darshan arrangements. Police have cited CCTV footage, witness statements and digital communications in support of these allegations.
The alleged possession of keys to donation boxes by Tinnu is particularly significant, as investigators examined how cash was moved from donation boxes to the counting areas.
The chargesheet records several cash recoveries, including Rs 16.82 lakh from Anukalp Mishra, around Rs 14.25 lakh from Lavkush Mishra, Rs 20.39 lakh and USD 1,121 from Avinash Shukla, Rs 7.32 lakh from Ramashankar Mishra, Rs 18.07 lakh from Karunesh Pandey and Rs 2 lakh from Manish Yadav.
Gold and silver articles were also allegedly recovered from some of the accused. Investigators examined bank deposits, withdrawals, property transactions, vehicles and other assets to establish the alleged money trail.
The investigation also covered donated valuables. The SIT physically verified 803 valuable articles recorded in the Trust’s software and found no discrepancies. Another 86 valuable articles for which receipts had not been issued were also physically verified.
The probe further examined silver donations, including silver bricks and other valuable articles, as well as silver sent for melting, according to the investigation.
The chargesheet has also raised questions over the role of two bank employees who had figured in the initial investigation but have not been named as accused.
The preliminary SIT inquiry had flagged shortcomings in the system for counting donations and the responsibilities assigned to bank officials. Bank employees deployed for counting were required to work on a rotation basis, while bank officials were also responsible for ensuring that personnel engaged in counting wore prescribed uniforms.
The role of the two bank employees was subsequently examined during the investigation, but they have not been made accused in the chargesheet.
The investigation has also prompted questions about the extent to which the responsibilities of senior Trust functionaries and the internal supervision of the donation-counting system were examined.
The chargesheet also reflects changes in the offences initially considered against the accused. Police have dropped provisions relating to house trespass and theft by a servant from the charges.
The chargesheet against the seven accused has been filed under sections 316(5) (criminal breach of trust by a public servant, banker, merchant or agent), 317(2) (dishonestly receiving or retaining stolen property), 317(5) (assisting in concealing or disposing of stolen property) and 61(2) (criminal conspiracy) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), besides sections 13(1)(a) and 13(2) (criminal misconduct by a public servant involving dishonest or fraudulent misappropriation) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
On the other hand, against Srivastava, the chargesheet invokes sections 316(5), 317(5) and 61(2) of the BNS along with provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, dropping charges under Section 317 (2) pertaining to receiving and retaining stolen property.
The changes assume significance as the defence had sought time to study the voluminous chargesheet before arguing the bail applications of Srivastava and Tinnu Yadav.
The court has ordered that copies of the chargesheet and necessary documents be supplied to all eight accused. They are scheduled to appear before the court on October 7.
After charges are framed, the prosecution will present its witnesses, besides documentary and other evidence, while the defence will have the opportunity to cross-examine witnesses and subsequently present its own evidence.
The case is now proceeding as State versus Anukalp Mishra and others.
